Skip to main content

Full text of "[untitled] The American Journal of Philology, (1892-01-01), pages 235-239"

See other formats


Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World 

This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in 
the world by JSTOR. 

Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other 
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the 
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. 

We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this 
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial 

Read more about Early Journal Content at 
journal-content . 

JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people 
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching 
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit 
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please 


maldt, not malath, which every Semitic student would consider as equivalent to 
fhfS) ' to save ' i but h ere a g a i n I must say that this is the meaning of the Piel, 
while the Qal means ' to escape.' For the correct etymology of avipanodov I 
refer Keller and his readers to Lagarde's Baktrische Lexicographic 23, rem. I. 
Not only is Pelagos derived from Hebrew j?B ' canal,' Middle High German 
bulge being completely ignored; Persephone from )13S"**)S (!) 'the fruit of the 
hidden,' i. e. ' Frucht des im Boden verborgen gewesenen Samenkorns,' but 
also Heracles from the Hebrew ?3"l 'to go around and about ' -|- article ha. 
Truly, one is reminded of the early days of Assyriology when H. Fox Talbot 
(Trans. Soc. Bibl. Arch. II 33) derived AiAwodc from the Assyrian ddn nfse 
'judge of the nations,' an epithet of the Sun-god Samas, pronounced by him 
diydn nise, or Hades (ib., p. 188), from Bit Edi or Bit Hadi\ but there is no 
such word in Assyrian; the ideographic expression being KUR NU-GI-A = 
erQit la tdrat ' the land whence no return.' 

I have only touched on a few points in the second part of Keller's book, a 
thorough criticism of which would fill a volume of about the same size as the 
book itself. To this part I shall return again in a special treatise on ' Semitic 
words in the Greek and Latin languages,' to be published in vol. XXIII of 
the Transactions of the American Philological Association. 

W. Muss-Arnolt. 

Kleine Schriften von Heinrich Ludolf Ahrens : erster Band. Zur Sprachwis- 
senschaft, besorgt von CARL Haeberlin, mit einem Vorwort von O. 
Crusius. Hannover, Hahn'sche Buchhandlung, i8gi. xv, 584. Price 
16 Marks. 

In these latter days, when the ancient reign of the classics is molested on 
every hand, it may seem a hazardous thing to adventure a volume of collected 
essays dating in part from the first half of the century. Greek has been voted 
a protected commodity by the Senate of the University of Cambridge, one of 
whose sons has taken up arms, whetted by his study of Aristotle, against the 
further supremacy of the language of the philosopher ; in America, as we all 
know, we have our own battle to fight ; and even in Germany we hear regrets 
for the old times. The number of students of Greek and Latin at the gymnasia 
and the universities there has, if we are correctly informed, sensibly diminished 
within the past decade ; and Caesar has now entered the lists against the 
dominion of the old-time studies. While the devoted adherents of Greek are 
convinced by the continual disclosure of new treasures of art and literature 
that they were never better fitted to understand and proclaim the lessons of 
the eternal Hellenic spirit, the world at large, it must be confessed, has grown 
somewhat impatient of the part Greek has played in our system of education. 

In taking up this first selection of the works of Ahrens it seems as if his 
shade would not rest, but arose to ask of his few surviving contemporaries : 

LTipfTCi yepatpot, riva wdTiig novel izdvov ; 
Ahrens was not only a great investigator, he was a great teacher. No one 
but a great teacher could have infused vitality into his theory that instruction 
in Greek should begin with the beginnings of its literature, and that its study 


should advance together with the development of the language until it reached 
the perfected form wrought by the master-workers of the Attic dialect. Ahrens 
was by inheritance a great teacher. He was the pupil of Otfried Milller, and 
at the Lyceum in Hanover he trained many pupils who have since won for 
themselves an honorable place in the history of classical philology. It is due 
to the loyalty of one of these pupils, Otto Crusius, now professor at Tubingen, 
that we are at last placed in a position to survey at least a part of the scientific 
activity of his master. We are also indebted to Dr. C. Haeberlin, to whom 
was entrusted the carrying out of Prof. Crusius' plan. Dr. Haeberlin has 
fulfilled his laborious task in a highly acceptable manner by verifying the 
references, infixing the pagination of the original publications and supplying 
convenient indices. 

Ahrens was born early enough to have drawn his inspiration from the ency- 
clopaedic instruction of the early leaders of philology, who were still under 
the influence of Wolf, early enough to have felt the stimulus of the first lin- 
guistic researches of Bopp ; but at a time when he was freed from the tempta- 
tion to divorce literature from language. To the end he was always pressing 
forward to keep pace with the investigations of younger generations of scholars. 
That he did not leave behind him a greater number of masterpieces is due in 
part to this restless activity, and in part to the requirements in the form of 
'programmes' and addresses exacted of the practical school-teacher, the pathos 
of whose lot speaks out with such intensity in the recently published Einleit- 
ung in die neugriechische Grammatik of Hatzidakis. Of the one hundred 
titles of Ahrens' works collected by Haeberlin, fully a fifth is the outcome of 
his practical duties as an educator of youth, which he remained to the last. 

Of Ahrens' joint pursuit of the study of classical antiquity and of comparative 
philology, the chief result, beyond all question, was the De Graecae linguae 
dialectis, published only ten years after its author obtained his doctor's degree 
at Gbttingen (1829) and in the year immediately following upon that which 
witnessed the appearance of the well-known tractate Ueber die Conjugation 
auf /« im homerischen Dialekte. It has been the singular fortune of the work 
on the Greek dialects that it held its ground uncontested by any rival for 
nearly forty years, despite, perhaps even because of the enormous increase of 
material illustrative of the subject. It is only recently that a part of the 
Dialects reappeared in a second edition under the care of Meister, to whom it 
was entrusted by its author shortly before his death; while no small part of 
the legacy of opportunity bequeathed by Ahrens to his successors still remains 
unclaimed. A comprehensive treatise on Ionic, a dialect of greater literary 
interest than Doric or Aiolic, which engaged Ahrens in the first two and only 
volumes of the Dialects, still does not exist. Of Ahrens' great work this is not 
the place to speak. It is one of those pioneering yet enduring works, one of 
those classical treatises in the history of philology which deserve, as Crusius 
well says, a place on the same shelf as Wolf's Prolegomena and Hermann's 

A striking feature of Ahrens' scientific activity is the emphasis he laid upon 
the study of the poetical monuments. Whether as an investigator of language 
or as a critical student of literature, he dealt with Homer, Hesiod, Pindar, 
Epicharmus, Sophron, the melic and elegiac poets. The tragic poets were, it 


is true, not a subject for special investigation with him. But Aeschylus he 
studied much, and besides the papers on the Agamemnon in the Philologus for 
i860, he wrote reviews of Bamberger's Choephoroe, Schoemann's Prometheus, 
and Franz' Oresteia. Nor is there manifest any lack of interest in mythology. 
Yet there is scarcely a single product of his pen dealing with Greek prose 
literature as such. Had Ahrens embraced Ionic in his researches, we should 
doubtless have heard his views on the question of the origin of Attic prose. 
The Ionisms of tragedy and Thucydides, though few in number, must bring 
close home to every one the problem of the influence exerted by Ionic upon 
the rise of Attic as an organ of literature. Throughout his life, so long as he 
occupied himself with the dialects, Ahrens gave, almost of necessity, greater 
scope to Doric and Aeolic ; and thus was easily led in time to that closer study 
of Theocritus which resulted in the edition of 1850 (of which there have been 
seven unchanged impressions) and in the larger work of 1855-59. 

Next to the Dialects, Ahrens' Theocritus is the work by which he is best 
known and by which his fame is ensured. The Theocritus is still the most 
exhaustive critical edition that we possess. In it, as elsewhere, Ahrens 
exhibited that fine sense of proportion which recognized as a characteristic 
virtue of Greek literature the subtle interrelation between the literary dialect 
and the ordinary speech of the people. The imperishable treatise that has 
taught us more than any other single contribution to the subject — Ueber die 
Mischung der Dialekte in der griechischen Lyrik — showed us that it is art, not 
the casual affinities of the individual, which regulates the delicate shading of 
dialectal speech in Greek literature. Greek literature, in one point at least, 
is unlike other literatures. From Homer till the latest period in which the 
literary genius of the Greeks was creative, the dialects were more or less 
commingled in poetry. In fact there exists scarcely any branch of the poetic 
art which did not consciously intervein one dialect with another. Now it is 
not to the renown of Ahrens that he admitted the existence of dialect admix- 
ture (Hermann had long before him seen the facts and attempted a solution of 
their interrelation), but that he found the law of permanence of literary type 
as expressed in dialectal language, i. e. that the various branches of the poetic 
art did not abandon the dialect in which they started. That in the existing 
monuments this principle is everywhere carried out may perhaps be denied. 
Yet in its essential features it still holds good, despite the recent assaults upon 
it by Fick. Ahrens avoided the dangers on either hand. In the inscriptions, 
though they record the actual usage of the time and are free from the suspicion 
of corruption at the hands of blundering scribes or of sciolists, he refused to 
see an absolute standard to control MS tradition. Nor, on the other hand, did 
he fail to recognize the fact that without epigraphy palaeography may starve. 
Ahrens would have rejected Fick's theory of the absolute authoritativeness of 
purely inscriptional testimony ; and wondered at the supersensitiveness of 
Fritzsche's musico-philological ear. Fritzsche thought that the minute shades 
of feeling expressed in Theocritus' use, now of an epic, now of a Doric or an 
Aiolic form, were to be apprehended only by the critic whose soul was attuned 
to this harmony of language, and in the same manner as it may apprehend the 
subtle variations in the last three measures of Beethoven's Symphony in a dur. 

In true present volume there is a goodly number of epigraphical essays. 


Most noteworthy is the well-known treatise on the Kyprian inscriptions, which 
still possesses a distinct value of its own. There are also commentaries on 
inscriptions from Olympia (Roehl 75, 112, 113), and a treatise on Lakonian. 
The dialect of the bucolic poets is represented only by the caustic review of 
Muhlmann's Leges dialecti qua Graecorum poetae bucolici usi sunt. 

Ahrens was undoubtedly stronger on the side of systematic grammar than of 
etymology. To work in etymology before the last quarter of this century was 
often a difficult and a dangerous thing. Ahrens suffered shipwreck on the 
rock of proper names. The lengthy treatise Ueber eine wichtige indogerman- 
ische Familie von Gotternamen can add nothing to his fame. The name of 
Poseidon has been discussed with better results by Pott and, in later times, by 
Prellwitz, than in the essay Ueber den Namen des Poseidon, though nowhere 
do we find a greater wealth of illustrative material. Other papers of an 
etymological character are : 'Pa, Beitrag zur gr. Etymologie und Lexicographie ; 
Kvly und Villa; Ein Beitrag zur Etymologie der gr. Zahlw6rter; Etymologi- 
sche Untersuchungen zum Homer (1. airavpau, iiravpionu, ipvu; 2. pvopai, 
kpvopai, eiptoo/iat, cdo(,ovpoc,''Qpai; 3. Einiges iiber die sogenannte Distraction ; 
4. ewai, apftsMaaai, eluteq); Apv( und seine Sippe. 

For the history of language and the study of prehistoric civilization it is 
imperative that the choice and use of words to denominate parts of the body 
and other common things be followed through the various languages. Ahrens 
set the type for this species of investigation in the treatise published shortly 
before his death: Die gr. und lat. Benennungen der Hand (Teubner, 1879). 
This work was of too great an extent to be incorporated in this volume. 

There can be no question that as a student of the formal side of grammar 
Ahrens must hold a very high place. It is astonishing how much is still correct 
in his Conjugation in p: im homerischen Dialekte, dedicated to Otfried Mttller 
in 1838. The Formenlehre des homerischen und attischen Dialektes is still 
serviceable, though the rapid advance of Homeric investigation along the lines 
laid down in part by Ahrens himself has rendered much out of date. Some 
time ago the reviewer was struck by the occurrence of rjpa in Herodas. Lucius' 
recent treatise on Crasis and Aphaeresis contains nothing on the question, but 
Ahrens, De Crasi, p. 60, gave an explanation of the form, to which that of 
Brugmann has been forced to yield. In the treatise On the Hand before 
mentioned, Ahrens anticipated Wackernagel's explanation of the form iavrov 
(K. Z. XXVII 279). 

Of the grammatical treatises we may notice especially the Homeric excurses 
which deal i. a. with the gen. in -00, the gemination of initial v, Tpaai, Tpo&s, 
TpuiSc, Tpoiq, the lengthening of short final syllables in the hexameter (four 
papers), and with certain legitimate species of hiatus. There is also a treatise 
on hiatus in the older elegiac poets. The discussion of the feminines in a has 
not lost its interest, despite the more recent investigation of the question by 
Danielsson and Johannes Schmidt. Here, as always, Ahrens supports his 
view with a wealth of illustration from literature, the inscriptions, and the 
grammarians which he knew equally well with the KOnigsbergers. Ahrens' 
erudition was in fact rivalled only by that of Lobeck. No one who has not 
himself worked his way into the enormous mass of grammatical literature can 
fail to be amazed at Ahrens' unwearied patience, firm grasp, and critical insight. 


It is needless to say that the treatises collected in this volume cannot claim 
the place they once enjoyed. Dies diem docet. We have learned that 
phonetic 'law' is more rigorous in its requirements than was imagined by the 
leaders of the past generation. The days of wonderment at the correlation of 
ordinary Greek and Latin forms has long gone by. But whatever the errors 
of Ahrens, all that he did bears the impress of a profound worker who left 
nothing neglected that might contribute its light to the discovery of the truth. 
For that reason these memorials of his life will always repay reading even by 
the most advanced specialist. 

The matter collected in the first volume of the Kleine Schriften deals with 
certain aspects of those grammatical studies which have always proved attrac- 
tive to American philologians. Prof. Crusius tells us that the publication of 
the second and concluding volume must depend upon the reception accorded 
to this. Will not American scholars support the devotion of Ahrens' pupil 
and the enterprise of the publisher in an undertaking which at best cannot 
prove highly remunerative, that they and others may possess a collection of 
essays dealing with the broader aspects of classical culture? 

Herbert Weir Smyth. 

Livy. Books I and II. Edited with Introduction and Notes, by J. B. Green - 
OUGH. Boston and London, Ginn & Co., 1891. 

Mr. Greenough's latest contribution to classical scholarship gives abundant 
evidence that its author has performed no perfunctory task, but has had before 
him certain definite ideals. The leading feature of the book is the endeavor 
to assist the student in grasping Livy's thoughts in the form and order in which 
the historian himself presents them. Great pains are taken to indicate the 
proper 'thought-perspective' of a complex idea, that the student may clearly 
discern what is emphatic and what is subordinate in the Latin sentence. The 
editor has on many previous occasions effectively urged this principle as one 
of prime importance in the study of Latin. In the present work he has gone 
further. With admirable skill and judgment he has so analyzed example after 
example of Livy's thought as to impress clearly upon the reader what it means 
to read Latin as Latin is written. 

Mr. Greenough's own special tastes and studies have naturally led him to 
emphasize matters of language much more prominently than history or anti- 
quities. In the two latter departments more might well have been given. Even 
Mommsen is but rarely cited, and there is no reference to the suggestive views 
of Ihne concerning the character of the early history of Rome. The general 
impression conveyed by the historical notes is that the whole history, of the 
regal period at least, is so uncertain that it is useless to undertake to arrive at 
any rational views concerning it. Even with regard to so well-determined a 
fact as the right of intermarriage between the inhabitants of different states, 
Mr. Greenough has no more positive declaration to make than that "it seems 
to have been carefully guarded among the ancients" (p. 30). 

In the grammatical notes, as a rule, no statement is made of the principle 
involved, but a simple reference to the grammar is given. It is questionable 
whether this method is a wise one to follow. Wherever the grammatical